Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
VamPyroX

Suggestions for Future C&C Titles?

Recommended Posts

Anyone have suggestions on what they should do if they do release another C&C title?

 

A Red Alert sequel/prequel/remake?

 

A Tiberian sequel/prequel/remake?

 

A Generals sequel/prequel/remake?

 

A new series?

 

Change how it's made or played?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A Red Alert sequel/prequel/remake?

 

A Tiberian sequel/prequel/remake?

 

A Generals sequel/prequel/remake?

 

A new series?

 

Change how it's made or played?

 

1. No, RA3 sucked.

2. No C&C4 sucked even more

3. No, they tried and it got cancelled

4. No.

5. No, see points 2 and 3

 

oh and btw C&C development got shut down, so... thats it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ever do another Generals. They should limit the infinite money. It completely killed the game for me once the option for infinite money was opened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ever do another Generals. They should limit the infinite money. It completely killed the game for me once the option for infinite money was opened.

 

I wish they did that for every C&C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ever do another Generals. They should limit the infinite money. It completely killed the game for me once the option for infinite money was opened.

Are you referring to those cash crates that constantly appear throughout the game or the Chinese hackers (after they've been promoted to the top)?

 

Unless there's something else I'm not aware of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they were to do another sequel or start a new series, it would be nice if they could give the game multiple endings depending on what you do throughout the game. Plus, they should have different missions based on what happened during the previous missions.

 

For instance, if they do another Red Alert game, they should allow you to continue the game without Tanya if she ever gets killed during a previous mission. Of course, the later missions will become more difficult without her.

 

What if one mission requires you to capture a building in order to use its technology? You accidentally destroy it. So, you continue the later missions... without capability of that technology.

 

So, instead of one ending for each faction... you could have 3 to 5 endings. This will encourage replays to see different endings.

 

If this was done with Red Alert 2 or Red Alert 3, you could have had up to 15 endings in the game.

 

It doesn't have to be too much work. Some maps can be reused with different objectives instead. For instance, mission 5 could be using the same map with different objectives. Mission 5A is with Tanya. She dies in Mission 4A. So, you play mission 5B instead using the same map as 5A, but with different objectives. You destroy a building in Mission 6A instead of capturing it. So, you play 7C... which is the same as 7A... but without the weather control building. Etc... etc.. etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they were to do another sequel or start a new series, it would be nice if they could give the game multiple endings depending on what you do throughout the game. Plus, they should have different missions based on what happened during the previous missions.

 

For instance, if they do another Red Alert game, they should allow you to continue the game without Tanya if she ever gets killed during a previous mission. Of course, the later missions will become more difficult without her.

 

What if one mission requires you to capture a building in order to use its technology? You accidentally destroy it. So, you continue the later missions... without capability of that technology.

 

So, instead of one ending for each faction... you could have 3 to 5 endings. This will encourage replays to see different endings.

 

If this was done with Red Alert 2 or Red Alert 3, you could have had up to 15 endings in the game.

 

It doesn't have to be too much work. Some maps can be reused with different objectives instead. For instance, mission 5 could be using the same map with different objectives. Mission 5A is with Tanya. She dies in Mission 4A. So, you play mission 5B instead using the same map as 5A, but with different objectives. You destroy a building in Mission 6A instead of capturing it. So, you play 7C... which is the same as 7A... but without the weather control building. Etc... etc.. etc...

 

I'd plus one that kind of single-player gameplay. Maybe losing a battle on the odd occasion opens up a different path of missions instead of having to beat them all one by one. In fact Tiberian Dawn did something very similar to this (but only maybe once), where destroying the "wrong" building for GDI mission 6 (the commando one) forces you to play an extra mission on the same map. Also one of the original "features" for the Nod campaign was you had to find all 3 crates to be able to use the nuke in the final battle, which was a buggy (and since removed) thing. I'm sure Nyerguds knows all of that stuff like the back of his hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd plus one that kind of single-player gameplay. Maybe losing a battle on the odd occasion opens up a different path of missions instead of having to beat them all one by one. In fact Tiberian Dawn did something very similar to this (but only maybe once), where destroying the "wrong" building for GDI mission 6 (the commando one) forces you to play an extra mission on the same map. Also one of the original "features" for the Nod campaign was you had to find all 3 crates to be able to use the nuke in the final battle, which was a buggy (and since removed) thing. I'm sure Nyerguds knows all of that stuff like the back of his hand.
I remember those.

 

You're right about the winning part. It can be fun to ensure that you win before you progress, but it can be more fun when you can still fail and still progress with bigger difficulty. That's something players can try when doing this approach. First, they try to win all the way. Then they accept a failure to play something different.

 

Perhaps, additional missions that allow you to redeem yourself if you should ever fail a previous mission? For instance, you have to capture an enemy advanced tech building to use their technology. You fail, but have another chance a couple missions later (makes the game longer and more difficult). :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Electronic Arts should do a HD version of all the older C&Cs

or

Hand over C&C's ownership to CnCNet :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emperor: Battle for Dune tried to work with winning/losing areas as campaign mechanic, where the AIs got turns to attack your areas too. It was an interesting concept, but since each area was a "mission"... well, let's just say, rescuing these same Ixian scientists for the 4th time got a bit tedious :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emperor: Battle for Dune tried to work with winning/losing areas as campaign mechanic, where the AIs got turns to attack your areas too. It was an interesting concept, but since each area was a "mission"... well, let's just say, rescuing these same Ixian scientists for the 4th time got a bit tedious :P

That sounds like a good concept.

 

They should have at least one mission where 3 factions are playing and it's every man for himself. Of course, depending on what course of action you take during the mission can influence who attacks who. Then the later missions change from there. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Electronic Arts should do a HD version of all the older C&Cs

or

Hand over C&C's ownership to CnCNet :D

Anyone over in CnCNet... with this response in mind, what would you do with it if EA turned over the games to you guys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not strictly affiliated with CnCNet, but if I had access to the source code I'd probably start trying to port it/them to linux and OS X and modern windows (and maybe android) to get a nice cross platform base before worrying about anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't cncnet open source? I think a lot of it is on github.

 

A lot of it is hacks in the games themselves, though, and those are still Win32, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, many to reply to.

 

- Yes, the crates and hackers. Happy to find another person who dislikes the money spam.

- I abused mission 6 with GDI; playing 7 and gathering like 1.000.000 credits. Thus starting the "difficult" (aka stupid civilians doing a picnic in tiberian) mission 8 with 200.000 credits.

- Battle for dune indeed had an interesting concept. But it was implemented stupid. They should have done that if you have 1 or more extra fields. Your starting ammount of money, units and starting location on the map are adjusted. The bonus force that you could use was of no importance. And them attacking you, ehm, well, GG after 2 minutes. -.-.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better to leave the series alone C&C 4 was quite bad not the worst game I played but it was boring ok if it was not a C&C game I see it as a spin-off  not a C&C game RA3 was ok but to much fiction but i never liked the Red Alert series that much at least after it got separated from the Tiberian universe after RA1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever notice how they've been making zombie versions of some FPS games?

 

What if they were to do that for Command & Conquer? I can see this being implemented as a mod into Yuri's Revenge as they already had the mind-control concept in place.

 

Think of those zombie movies and television shows...

 

Ever notice how they turn people into zombies after scratches or bites? That could be something where infantry become infected (depending on the armor or body protection suits they wear) and become your enemy.

 

Ever notice how it takes a certain number of zombies to overcome vehicles? Cars can't move with 10 or 15 zombies. Trucks can't move with 15 or 20 zombies. And so on...

 

That could be implemented where for every one person that becomes infected, 2 more spawn elsewhere. Plus, they don't follow any strategy... making them unpredictable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever notice how they've been making zombie versions of some FPS games?

That's usually censored versions in countries that don't like video games where you kill real people, though.

 

C&C had robot soldiers instead  :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Wolfenstein-games turned the opponents into zombies.

 

Tiberian Zombies.... Renegade.... a gamemode, in which you've got to fight and survive against tiberian mutants, would be interesting.

 

I also like the sound of branching missions in C&C. Wing Commander uses that principle. And playing WC on different paths appeals to gamers even today. So why not doing it on C&C? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Wolfenstein-games turned the opponents into zombies.

 

Tiberian Zombies.... Renegade.... a gamemode, in which you've got to fight and survive against tiberian mutants, would be interesting.

 

I also like the sound of branching missions in C&C. Wing Commander uses that principle. And playing WC on different paths appeals to gamers even today. So why not doing it on C&C? :)

Yeah. It can be like survivor mode where you have to constantly maintain your base and keep those vehicles/soldiers coming... while the number of zombies coming will increase. Plus, the zombies will not have weapons. So, you won't have to worry about long-distance damage. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more freedom of next mission choice than in EBfD.

 

Also that if you leave a region alone for a while, this one slowly grows stronger and stronger.

With a certain ammount, it attacks you instead!

 

However, this requires a limit to your own regions in strength. A RISK like board if you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a viceroid virus?

 

If a viceroid touches a soldier, they eventually become viceroids themselves.

 

In order to complete the mission, you have to find all the viceroids and destroy them (or maybe capture them with viceroid capturing technology).

 

There could be different levels of viceroids... they evolve throughout the game from small to giant.

 

Ever see Evolution? Remember the beginning with small creatures... then at the end, a football-sized monster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was replaying Tiberian Dawn the other day and while watching the mission select screen (you see the Earth rotating, then a grid appears, zooms in, country boundaries outlined, GDI/NOD progression colored, etc), I suddenly thought of this... why not make the game maps in spherical format?

 

Know how we have Google Earth? Why not make the game that way? The view of the map will change depending on how you scroll around the maps. For instance, if place a building at one location... scroll to the right until I'm 1/4 around the globe... scroll up until I'm 1/4th around the globe... then scroll to the left until I'm 1/4th around the globe. I'll be right back where I started... except that the building will be rotated 90 degrees clockwise.

 

You could attack your enemies from any direction.

 

While all of this may sound confusing, it does force us to think harder instead of focusing only one side or one view.

 

Of course, you can always set it up so that the map only shows you with NORTH being up.

sphere.jpg.231f506b149d1855cf5ea77efc988bbe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...